Author
|
Topic: NASA report: Apollo missions were a failure
|
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-04-2008 08:43 PM
The Guardian: Epic missions were flops, claims NASA A British study, commissioned by NASA, has concluded that many of the world's greatest expeditions, including the Apollo moon missions, were either short-term or long-term failures - or both. Although hailed as heroes, Raleigh, Shackleton and other explorers made less of an impact on world affairs than previously thought, says the report....Apollo achieved its goal of putting men on the moon before the Russians, but the equipment used had no application for other projects. The programme cost £70bn in today's money. NASA has since struggled to find a reason to put men into space; hence the interest [in the study by] executives setting up the Constellation programme which will take astronauts back to the moon next decade and later to Mars. From the specific focus of the study -- judging expeditions such as the Apollo missions by their ability to affect long term change -- "failure" may still be too strong a word. While Apollo did fail at pushing humankind further into the solar system, a fault that even von Braun recognized as it was happening (which in turn led to his own proposal to cancel the latter Apollo missions in favor of an immediate refocus on Mars), it would be hard to sustain an argument that Apollo didn't change the world in other ways ("...made less of an impact on world affairs than previously thought.") It would be interesting to see the full report on which this article is based... |
E2M Lem Man Member Posts: 846 From: Los Angeles CA. USA Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 10-04-2008 08:51 PM
But by their definition, Columbus's missions to the new world were failures also.J.M. Busby |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-04-2008 08:55 PM
quote: Originally posted by E2M Lem Man: But by their definition, Columbus's missions to the new world were failures also.
To the contrary, the report, per the article, suggests that Columbus' voyages were one of only two with "merit". Only Columbus's and John Franklin's 1845 expedition to find the Northwest Passage - on which all his 129 crewmen died - had any strategic merit, it was found....With Columbus and Franklin, the failures were mitigated by long-term beneficial results; the former discovered the New World, while ships sent to find Franklin made key discoveries that led to the finding of the Northwest Passage. |
FFrench Member Posts: 3165 From: San Diego Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 10-05-2008 12:03 AM
quote: Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: per the article... ...Columbus....discovered the New World
I wonder how the approximately 15 to 20 million residents (some anthropologists estimate higher) of North America in 1492 would respond to this tired old reportage that Columbus "discovered" anywhere. Sure, Europe at the time was unaware of the continent until those explorations, so it was an exploration into the unknown for him to be sure - but it's time the Guardian and other modern sources retired this hackneyed, inaccurate cliché.Similarly, the article's claim that Apollo equipment had "no application for other projects" seems nonsensical. The Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft had numerous other uses as a heavy-lift vehicle and manned spacecraft, as evidenced by Skylab and recent efforts to emulate the basic design architectures again for future explorations. Most would argue that it was a failure of funding to create and use more equipment, not the equipment itself, that led to Apollo's demise. |
cspg Member Posts: 6222 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
|
posted 10-05-2008 12:17 AM
quote: Originally posted by FFrench: I wonder how the approximately 15 to 20 million residents (some anthropologists estimate higher) of North America in 1492 would respond to this tired old reportage that Columbus "discovered" anywhere.
For one, and two "With Columbus and Franklin, the failures were mitigated by long-term beneficial results;", any native American on this forum (for example)? Beneficial to whom? quote: Most would argue that it was a failure of funding to create and use more equipment, not the equipment itself, that lead to Apollo's demise.
I agree.Chris. |
Apollo Redux Member Posts: 346 From: Montreal, Quebec, Canada Registered: Sep 2006
|
posted 10-05-2008 12:51 AM
Hmmmmm Columbus - 1492... Jamestown, Va 1609Apollo a failure? Seems the Rule Britannia crowd are not only premature, but have a heavy dose of 18th century wish-you-were-here. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-05-2008 12:53 AM
quote: Originally posted by FFrench: Most would argue that it was a failure of funding to create and use more equipment, not the equipment itself, that led to Apollo's demise.
Yes, but the report (per the article) is not referring to Apollo's demise, but the failure to send humans into the solar system. The Apollo missions achieved their initial goal of putting men on the moon but failed to fulfil NASA's long-term hopes of opening the solar system to human exploration. Could Apollo hardware be adapted to support such missions? Maybe, but they weren't designed with that in mind. A multi-purpose spacecraft design might have, for example, ruled out any need for the space shuttle, as supporting Earth orbit operations would be included with the larger context of a modular vehicle architecture. That said, one could argue (perhaps rightfully so) that the fundamental principle behind the report's findings (if indeed the article is accurately reporting such) is at fault, as expanding humans into the solar system was not a priority, if even a secondary one, at the time the Apollo program was proposed. But, if you accept that further exploration beyond the Moon was in NASA's interest, then the chosen vehicle architecture could be seen as driven by a single destination design. |
FFrench Member Posts: 3165 From: San Diego Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 10-05-2008 01:15 AM
Hi Robert,I certainly agree with you about the context of the wider points in the article about the report. I was referring to the specific sentence (which may of course be the misreading of the journalist, rather than anything stated in the report itself) which states: "By contrast, Apollo achieved its goal of putting men on the moon before the Russians, but the equipment used had no application for other projects." That's simply not true. Skylab actually demonstrated its successful application for other projects. And additionally, if could be argued, Apollo hardware - particularly the Saturn V heavy-lift rocket with all its launch pad, assembly and manufacturing infrastructure - would have been an ideal starting point for further outward human space exploration. It certainly had far more capability to do so than the manned systems before and after it - and is being replicated in many vital aspects for NASA's future plans. For the article to suggest the equipment was at fault is incorrect. An analogy would be to build a successful sailing ship, make successful voyages - then burn the ship, never make the voyages again, and say that the ship failed somehow. |
GACspaceguy Member Posts: 2516 From: Guyton, GA Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 10-05-2008 04:04 AM
"...Apollo achieved its goal of putting men on the moon before the Russians, but the equipment used had no application for other projects."Fuel cells, heat shields, thermal blankets, guidance systems, engine technology, data transmission/acquisition and the list goes on and on of those things that came about due to the drive that was Apollo (although not all built directly for Apollo they were developed for the ultimate goal of the Apollo program). By saying the equipment for Apollo had no further application is similar to saying that the Wright Flyer was a waste of time, it was a stepping stone to the next level. The problem here is typical of human nature, once at the top of the 1000 step staircase no one remembers the first few steps. The Apollo program allowed for a dash of the first steps, now the rest of the journey must be a calculated one, now that we understand the difficulties of the environment that is beyond our thin atmosphere.
|
poofacio Member Posts: 268 From: United Kingdom Registered: Oct 2006
|
posted 10-05-2008 07:05 AM
And non stick frying pans!I apologise for the ridiculous report from the UK. Here we have trouble putting a man on a train so the report was probably born out of envy, David |
Ross Member Posts: 479 From: Australia Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 10-05-2008 08:37 AM
I agree that this is one of the most ridiculous reports I've ever read about. Apart from any arguments over Apollo, why were those six voyages chosen and who would claim that they were many of the world's greatest expeditions? What about Cook's voyage into the Pacific, Darwin's voyage of discovery, the first circumnavigation of the globe, the Voyager probes to the edge of the Solar System and beyond, Marco Polo's journey to China, the Chinese Great Fleet which reached Africa and may even have rounded the Horn of Africa? Need I go on? Pick failures (not counting Apollo) and surprise, surprise the conclusion is that they were failures!Ross. |
Richard Glueck Member Posts: 15 From: Winterport, Maine, USA Registered: Sep 2007
|
posted 10-05-2008 10:21 AM
Nonsense, for all the reasons our colleagues have already stated. |
Delta7 Member Posts: 1527 From: Bluffton IN USA Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted 10-05-2008 10:22 AM
I, for one, am looking forward to the next string of space program failures! ![](http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/wink.gif) |
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1332 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 10-05-2008 01:13 PM
The revolution in the telecommunications industry is certainly the result of Apollo.-Lou |
Rob Joyner Member Posts: 1308 From: GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 10-05-2008 01:55 PM
At least the Apollo program got the astronauts to their planned lunar destination.It's been a while since elementary school but wasn't Columbus trying to find a 'shortcut' to India and ended up on the opposite side of Earth? And wasn't it Ponce de Leon who actually led the first European expedition to set foot upon what is now Florida? |
leslie Member Posts: 231 From: Surrey, England Registered: Aug 2005
|
posted 10-06-2008 06:16 AM
I am amazed at the use of the word failure being applied to the American Space programme. My understanding of the Apollo programme was the objective of designing a suitable craft to land men on the moon and to return them safely to Earth. This objective was achieved at great cost, not least of human lives!That word should be retracted from the article. I'm with Poofacio...this country should keep a very low profile at the moment. We are lucky if we can find a train that works, let alone put a man on the train... Shame on the author. ------------------ Leslie Cantwell |
kr4mula Member Posts: 642 From: Cinci, OH Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 10-06-2008 11:48 AM
I think an important distinction should be made between whether the voyages were inherent failures, i.e. the proverbial roads to nowehere, or were simply not capitalized upon. By their verbiage, yes, Apollo hardware was not used for other programs (if you count Skylab as an extension of Apollo), but that doesn't mean that it couldn't have been used if national policies went in that direction. Apollo had a great heavy-lift system, rockets and engines with an unprecedented reliability rate, and a spacecraft with some degree of versatility (witness ASTP). It certainly could have been the backbone for a space station program, a Mars program, or whatever came along if NASA didn't throw it out in the press for reusability.Cheers, Kevin |
robsouth Member Posts: 769 From: West Midlands, UK Registered: Jun 2005
|
posted 10-06-2008 12:47 PM
quote: Originally posted by poofacio: Here we have trouble putting a man on a train.
Hahahahaha! So funny, and yet so true. The goal of Apollo was to put a man on the moon and get him home safely... job done in my books. |
mjanovec Member Posts: 3811 From: Midwest, USA Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 10-06-2008 01:28 PM
quote: Originally posted by robsouth: The goal of Apollo was to put a man on the moon and get him home safely... job done in my books.
I agree. One must compare the stated goals for the Apollo program against the actual results. When that comparison is made, the Apollo program can only be viewed as a tremendous success. In fact, Apollo gave us more than what was originally outlined. We got multiple missions, extended stays, multiple scientific experiments, and dedicated geological explorations. If there was any failure, it was a failure to foresee in 1961 that a moon landing would be viewed more as an "end" rather than another step towards greater exploration beyond the moon. The thinking in 1961 had to be that the Russians would also likely land on the moon (either before or after the US landings). And then, the space race would take us forward to the next step, and so on...with each country vying for the prize of the next "first" to be had. In 1961, it didn't seem likely that the Russians would just abandon their lunar landing program once they had been beaten...assuming they could be beaten (which wasn't a guarantee). |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-07-2008 04:06 PM
The full report is now online: Historical Exploration: Learning Lessons from the Past to Inform the Future (PDF) This report examines a number of exploration campaigns that have taken place during the last 700 years, and considers them from a risk perspective. The explorations are those led by Christopher Columbus, Sir Walter Raleigh, John Franklin, Sir Ernest Shackleton, the Company of Scotland to Darien and the Apollo project undertaken by NASA. To provide a wider context for investigating the selected exploration campaigns, we seek ways of finding analogies at mission, programmatic and strategic levels and thereby to develop common themes. Ultimately, the purpose of the study is to understand how risk has shaped past explorations, in order to learn lessons for the future. From this, we begin to identify and develop tools for assessing strategic risk in future explorations. |
Apollo Redux Member Posts: 346 From: Montreal, Quebec, Canada Registered: Sep 2006
|
posted 10-07-2008 08:58 PM
"It Came from Outer Space: Everyday Products and Ideas from the Space Program" - Marjolijn Bijlefeld and Robert BurkeThe truth is there is not one person using the internet today, or living in a modern community, that has not benefited from the advancements in space exploration. And oh yeah, the Apollo missions were part of it. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-09-2008 01:06 AM
Former flight director and space shuttle program manager Wayne Hale responded this report on his blog: Yesterday I was handed a paper to read which was commissioned by the Constellation Program to see if there was anything we could learn from historical exploration as a lesson for NASA. That was a great idea. I was excited to see that the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland was the scholarly organization which produced this paper. I was just there! I had walked across the campus! wow, small world! I had great hopes for this paper. After I read it, I felt disappointment. I slept on it. I read it again this morning. I am still disappointed. Probably it is not fair; the attempt to learn lessons from history is always a noble one. Perhaps this is just too big a topic to address in a short academic paper. So rather than criticize, lets take a look beyond the Venn diagrams and explore for the golden nuggets of wisdom that come with a deep understanding of the lessons that history of exploration can teach us. The Strathclyde study said that Columbus's voyages were a tactical ("program") failure and a strategic success. Really? |
Obviousman Member Posts: 438 From: NSW, Australia Registered: May 2005
|
posted 10-09-2008 11:47 PM
Slight deviation:IIRC, teflon (and thus the non-stick frypan) came from the development of the atomic bomb. |
spacekid2 Member Posts: 199 From: San Diego, CA, USA Registered: Jul 2004
|
posted 10-15-2008 02:35 PM
Speaking of failures...And let's not forget Asrtonuts Wallace & Gromit. They did fly to the moon and discover it is made of cheese after all. Let's chalk up that mistake to NASA's short sighted space program. How could the Apollo Astronauts not have known that? I guess they wasted their time on the moon's surface picking up rocks. They could have enjoyed a piece of sharp cheddar. ![](http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/smile.gif) --Paul |
rodpyle Member Posts: 23 From: Pasadena, California, USA Registered: Dec 2008
|
posted 12-06-2008 12:44 PM
Brings to mind Robert F. Scott (though I am a Shackleton fan myself..). Never was a "failure" (and, as an expedition, it certainly was) more inspiring! Admunson was the better explorer, but makes dull reading in comparison.I know the original post was about Apollo hardware, but one could possibly argue that the program overall, if we look beyond a manned-flight perspective, certainly propelled the unmanned exploration of the solar system, which has been brilliant. And, on a lighter note, let's not forget the 1960's plans to send an Apollo CSM and modified upper stage on a long looping trip to.. Venus! Never occurred, but an interesting (and vaguely disturbing!) thought.
|
Duke Of URL Member Posts: 1316 From: Syracuse, NY Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 01-04-2009 11:57 AM
Lots of things were "failures". Post-It Notes were the outcome of a failed attempt to create a super-strong adhesive. For that matter, my marriages were failures (a few involved actual explosions).The point is that failure to reach the stated goal (glue or wedded bliss) doesn't mean you flunked as long as you had fun or got something productive out of the exercise. |